Go to Part 9...
…Worship and Encountering the Divine…
Part Eight
“The Creed of Yeshua – The Second Adam”
1 Corinthians 15:12-28
Now if Moshiach be preached that he rose from the
dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? (13) But if there be no resurrection of the dead,
then is Moshiach not risen: (14) And if
Moshiach be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also
vain. (15) Yea, and we are found false witnesses of
Elohim; because we have testified of Elohim that he raised up Moshiach: whom he
raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
(16)
For if the dead rise not, then is not Moshiach raised: (17) And if Moshiach be not raised, your faith is
vain; ye are yet in your sins. (18) Then they
also which are fallen asleep in Moshiach are perished. (19) If in this life only we have hope in
Moshiach, we are of all men most miserable.
(20) But now is Moshiach risen from the dead, and
become the firstfruits of them that slept.
(21) For since by man came death, by man came also
the resurrection of the dead.
(22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Moshiach
shall all be made alive.
(23) But every man in his own order: Moshiach the
firstfruits; afterward they that are of Moshiach at his coming.
(24) Then cometh the end, when he shall have
delivered up the Kingdom to Elohim, even the Father; when he shall have put
down all rule and all authority and power.
(25) For he must reign, till he hath put all
enemies under his feet. (26) The last
enemy that shall be destroyed is death. (27) For he
hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under
him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under
him.
(28) And when all things shall be subdued unto
him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things
under him, that Elohim may be all in all.[1]
Mark 12:28-37
And one of the scribes came, and having heard
them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked
him, Which is the first mitzvah of all?
(29) And Y'shuw`a answered him,
The first of all The Commandments is, Hear, O
Yisrael; YY [YHVH] our Elohim is ONE
YY :
(30) And thou shalt love YY thy Elohim with all
thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy
strength: this is the first mitzvah.
(31) And the second is like, namely this, Thou
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other mitzvah greater than
these.
(32) And the scribe said unto him, Well, Rabbi,
thou hast said the truth: for there is one Elohim; and there is none other but
he: (33) And to love him with all the heart, and with
all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to
love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices.
(34) And when Y'shuw`a saw that he answered
discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the Kingdom of Elohim. And
no man after that durst ask him any question.
(35) And Y'shuw`a answered and said, while he
taught in the Temple, How say the scribes HaMoshiach is the Son of David? (36) For David himself said by Ruach HaKadesh, YY
said to my Lord, Sit thou on my Right Hand, till I make thine enemies thy
footstool. (37) David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and
whence is he then his son? And the common people heard him gladly.[2]
Today's installment will not bring us closer to a solution of the Creed that Yeshua followed for a reason. I write today with heaviness in my heart. Sadly I am
reminded ever of the gap between our Jewish brethren those of us who believe in
Messiah. I’m not just talking about Christians, but those of us who call
ourselves Messianic believers and hold to the Torah, the commandments of God. For
the gap that exists I must rightly say was imposed by the centuries of
anti-Semitism that emanated from the church, yet by the same token, it has only
gotten wider by the anti-anything-to-do-with-Jesus factions of Judaism. This “anti-Jesus”
mentality has also robbed the Jewish people of the scholarship of their ancient
sages, profound thinkers that sought out the nature of God and who explored what
it meant to be a Jew. As a Messianic believer, I find myself further and further
away from the religion of Christianity as it is practiced today. Too much of
the church has forsaken the sacred and embraced the profane in its attempt to
be “relevant” in today’s world; that is a shame for if the church would only
embrace the Truth of God’s word, then there would be no reason to try to be
“relevant” – it just would be.
And what is the truth? Well, for one, I am truly more
and more convinced that belief in Yeshua Ha’Machiach is salvation and Judaism
is the only true religion, the faith once delivered for all. A small disclaimer
to this statement is needed though: Judaism in its current form maybe not be
perfect, but it will be when as a community it [Judaism] returns to pure worship
in the form the Father wanted it to be and when it recognizes its Messiah.
Alas, there is where my sadness comes in. In an earlier part of this study
(which has taken on greater dimensions than I had ever planned) I said I was
teachable and correctable: well here is where I correct myself. I had made a
statement to the fact that Judaism was and has always been a monotheistic
religion; that is just slightly misstating the case as I have found in my
continuous studies.
In this study I probably have offended some, and for
this I apologize. One way I may have offended is in the way I simply right the
title “God”. I do not want to appear insensitive to my Jewish brethren who revere the
name of our God; there are those who may say because I don’t write “God” as “G-d” or HaShem that I’m
disrespectful at least, or taking the Father’s name ( or title?) in vain.
I truly do not wish to offend; as a believer in Messiah and the Torah, I try to be mindful of the sensitivity and the respect for the Father, blessed be His Holy name, that Judaism holds to.
While
this is a bit of a rabbit trail, I’d like to just say a few words about this though. The
substitution of G-d and L-rd, etc., for Yahvey is a rabbinic
tradition that nullifies God’s Word, even though the reasons are understandable and admirable. (And of course, by writing out the name of
God, I realize I’ve offended again!)
Matthew 15:1-9: 1 Then some P’rushim[3]
and Torah-teachers from Yerushalayim[4]
came to Yeshua and asked him, 2 “Why is it that your talmidim[5]
break the Tradition of the Elders? They don’t do n’tilat-yadayim[6]
before they eat!” 3 He answered, “Indeed, why do you break the
command of God by your tradition?
4 For
God said, ‘Honor your father and
mother,’i and ‘Anyone
who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’j 5 But
you say, ‘If anyone says to his father or mother, “I have promised to give to
God what I might have used to help you,” 6 then he is rid of
his duty to honor his father or mother.’ Thus by your tradition you make null
and void the word of God! 7 You hypocrites! Yesha‘yahu[7]
was right when he prophesied about you,
8 ‘These people
honor me with their lips,
but
their hearts are far away from me.
9 Their worship of
me is useless,
Avram Yehosua, a Messianic elder of the Seed of Abraham
writes:
“…The name of Yahveh occurs 6,823 times in the Tanach (Hebrew
Bible/Old Testament).[9]
It’s forbidden by the Rabbis to say the name of Yahveh because they don’t want
anyone to profane it, thereby sinning against God by ‘taking His name in vain’
(Ex. 20:7; Dt. 5:11). This interpretation and restriction, which is held to
most adamantly, goes against God and His Word. It is purely a rabbinic concept…”[10]
With all due respect to the Rabbinical system of Judaism, I try very hard to follow halacha and to walk as I should within the concepts and confines of
what I believe Judaism is and how it applies to me, a goy; but I must say I agree with Daniel Boyarin, a
professor of Talmud at the University of California in Berkley, had to say
about this matter:
“… it may be helpful to challenge some of our closely held assumptions
about what religions are.
For moderns, religions are fixed sets of convictions
with well-defined boundaries. We usually ask ourselves: What convictions does
Christianity forbid or what practices does it require? We ask similar questions
in regard to Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, and Buddhism, the so-called great
religions of the world. Such an understanding, of course, makes nonsense of the
idea that one could be both a Jew and a Christian, rendering it just a
contradiction in terms. Jews don’t fit the definition of Christians, and Christians
don’t fit the definition of Jews. There are simple incompatibilities between
these two religions that make it impossible to be both. I will argue in this
book that this conception just doesn’t always fit the facts, and specifically
that it doesn’t represent well the situation of Judaism and Christianity in the
early centuries at all.
We usually define members of religions by using a kind
of checklist. For instance, one could say that if someone believes in the
Trinity and incarnation, she is a member of the religion Christianity, but if
she doesn’t, she isn’t a proper member of that religion. One could say,
conversely, that if someone does not believe in the Trinity and incarnation,
then he is a member of the religion Judaism, but if he does believe in those
things, he isn’t. One could also say that if someone keeps the Sabbath on
Saturday, eats only kosher food, and circumcises her sons, she is a member of
the Jewish religion, but if she doesn’t, she is not a member of the Jewish
religion. Or, conversely again, if some group believes that everyone should
keep the Sabbath, eat only kosher food, and circumcise sons, they are not
Christians, but if they believe that these practices have been superseded, then
they are Christians. This is, as I have said, our usual way of looking at such
matters.
However, this manner of categorizing people’s
religions runs into difficulties. First, someone has to be making the
checklists. Who decides what specific beliefs disqualify a person from being a
Jew? Throughout history these decisions have been made by certain groups of
people or individuals and are then imposed on other people (who may, however,
refuse—unless the deciders have an army). It’s a little bit like those “race”
checklists on the census forms. Some of us simply refuse to check a box that
defines us as Caucasian or Hispanic or African American because we don’t
identify that way, and only laws, and courts, or an army could force us to if
they chose to. Of course, it will be asserted that the decisions about Jews and
Christians (not Americans) were made by God and revealed in this Scripture or
that, by this prophet or that, but this is a matter of faith, not of
scholarship. Neither faith nor theology should play a role in the attempt to
describe what was, as opposed to what ought to have been (according to this
religious authority or another)…” [11]
In defining who is a Jew, what the
Jewish religion is, who isn’t a Jew, what isn’t the Jewish religion, the
process it seems is the same as Christianity – a process of exclusion, of rules
and check-points that say you can be this, but not this. I want to make it
perfectly clear. I am not trying to be a Jew because I follow Torah. I’m trying
to do what God expects of me – even if it is calling upon His Holy and Blessed
Name. I Read His word and Follow His commands as they apply to me and as Judaism dictates, as long as it does not violate my belief in Messiah. The
temple is no more: I cannot sacrifice (couldn’t even if there was a Temple, for
I am not in the Land…); I cannot do the things assigned to the priesthood, I’m
not of the Aaronic line. Many of God’s commands I cannot do, but there are many
I can. I believe Moshe when he wrote:
Exodus 12:43-49 (Tanakh)
43 “...The Lord said to Moses and Aaron: This is the law of the passover offering: No foreigner shall eat of it. 44But any slave a man has bought may eat of it once he has been circumcised. 45No bound or hired laborer shall eat of it. 46It shall be eaten in one house: you shall not take any of the flesh outside the house; nor shall you break a bone of it. 47The whole community of Israel shall offer it. 48If a stranger who dwells with you would offer the passover to the Lord, all his males must be circumcised; then he shall be admitted to offer it; he shall then be as a citizen of the country. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.
43 “...The Lord said to Moses and Aaron: This is the law of the passover offering: No foreigner shall eat of it. 44But any slave a man has bought may eat of it once he has been circumcised. 45No bound or hired laborer shall eat of it. 46It shall be eaten in one house: you shall not take any of the flesh outside the house; nor shall you break a bone of it. 47The whole community of Israel shall offer it. 48If a stranger who dwells with you would offer the passover to the Lord, all his males must be circumcised; then he shall be admitted to offer it; he shall then be as a citizen of the country. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.
And again:
Numbers 15:14-16 (Tanakh)
14 “…And when,
throughout the ages, a stranger who has taken up residence with you, or one who
lives among you, would present an offering by fire of pleasing odor to the
Lord—as you do, so b-shall it be done by 15the rest of the congregation.-b
There
shall be one law for you and for the resident stranger; it shall be a law for
all time throughout the ages. You and the stranger shall be alike before the
Lord; 16the same ritual and the same rule shall apply to you and to
the stranger who resides among you…”[13]
One Law, One Torah. We were always meant to be one
people, Jew and Gentile, a people led by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. One people with
one Messiah. Yet something horribly went wrong. Early church leaders sought to
pull a "new religion" they contrived out and away from its Jewish roots and the Jewish
rabbis were all too happy to see them go – but every action has an equal and
opposite reaction, complete with unintended consequences. The modern Jews blame
the “New Testament and its Jesus” for all the terrors and horrors the Jewish
people have endured over the past 2000 years, yet as always, the blame isn’t on
the Book or the Messiah – it falls squarely on the shoulders of those who
misused and misconstrued the words and the message of Yeshua. It was inevitable
that there was to be a parting of the ways, simply because the "new religion" of Christianity choose to distance itself from the faith given once for all: instead of embracing what God had
set into motion, both sides then choose a path that has led to what we have today,
two religions whose roots were the same, but are now at odds with one another,
one more to blame than the other. Out of these two competing systems emerged
another: a group of God-fearers who embrace the totality of the word of God and His Messiah yet are shunned by all.
Boyarin continues his examination using Jerome (A.D.
347–420) who is described in Christian literature as “…one of the most
important Christian scholars, thinkers, and writers of the late fourth and
early fifth centuries…”. [14]
After explaining how Jerome was instrumental in defining the “new orthodoxy” of
the Christian church, he quotes from Jerome’s own correspondence in writings to
Augustine of Hippo. Jerome wrote:
“…In our own day there exists
a sect among the Jews throughout all the synagogues of the East, which is
called the sect of the Minei, and is even now condemned by the Pharisees. The
adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they believe in Christ
the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary; and they say that He who suffered
under Pontius Pilate and rose again, is the same as the one in whom we believe.
But while they desire to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither the one
nor the other.” [15]
Boyarin states: “…A close look at Jerome’s text will
explain several of the points that I have been making. Jerome described a group
of people who believed in the orthodox Nicene Creed: Christ is the son of God,
he was born of a virgin, he was crucified and suffered, he rose. But they
thought they were Jews too—they prayed in synagogues, kept the Sabbath, and
adhered to dietary and other rules. In fact, they didn’t see “Christians” and
“Jews” as two categories at all but as one complex category. Presumably they
were practicing some sort of Jewish ritual as well, although it is unclear from
Jerome’s statement precisely what it was. Jerome denied them their claim of
being Christian, because they claimed to be Jews; he denied them their claim to
be Jews, because they claimed to be Christians. And he certainly denied them
the possibility of being both, because that was an impossibility in Jerome’s
worldview. For him (and for us as well), these were mutually exclusive
possibilities. However, for these Jews who confessed the Nicene Creed, there
was no contradiction. Just as today there are Jews who are Hassidic—some of
whom believe that the Messiah has come, died, and will be resurrected—and Jews
who reject the Hassidic movement entirely but all are considered Jews, so in
antiquity there were Jews who were believers in Christ and Jews who weren’t,
but all were Jews. To use another comparison that is evocative if not entirely
exact, it is as if non-Christian Jews and Christian Jews were more like
Catholics and Protestants today than like Jews and Christians today—parts of
one religious grouping, not always living in harmony or recognizing each
other’s legitimacy but still in a very important sense apprehensible as one
entity.
In order to protect the orthodox notion that there is
an absolute distinction between Jews and Christians, Jerome had to “invent” a
third category, neither Christians nor Jews. Jerome, backed up by the fiats of
Emperor Constantine’s Council of Nicaea and the law of the Roman Empire, the
code of the Emperor Theodosius, rather imperiously declared that some folks
were simply not Christians; even more surprisingly, he claimed he could decide
that they were not Jews either, because they didn’t fit his definition of Jews.
No one before Constantine had had the power to declare some folks not
Christians or not Jews.
Jerome tells us something about the synagogue
leadership here as well: they also condemned these people as not Jews, thus
applying a similar type of checklist to read people out of a group. But there’s
more yet. Jerome gives fascinating names to this sect of not-Jews,
not-Christians. He calls them, as we’ve seen, minei and Nazarenes. These names,
mysterious as they seem at first, are really not mysteries at all. They refer
to two terms used in the rabbinic prayer against the sectarians, which is, in
fact, first firmly attested in Jerome’s fifth century (although earlier forms
of it are known from the third century). In this prayer, repeated in the
synagogues, Jews used to say: “And to the minim and to the Notzrim, let there
be no hope.” The term minim means, literally, “kinds.” Jews who don’t belong to
the group that the Rabbis wish to define as kosher are named by them as “kinds”
of Jews, not entirely mainstream. This included Jews who are not quite
halakhically/theologically correct, such as followers of Jesus, but still Jews.
The second term, Notzrim (Latinized as Nazarenes), is much more specific,
referring as it does to Nazareth and thus explicitly to Christians. This is
plausibly the very prayer to which Jerome is referring in his letter, since his
alleged condemnation by the Pharisees comprises precisely these two names for
the group. The word minim seems just to mean sectarians in a general sense,
including such as these who follow the Jewish law but confess the Nicene Creed.
The word Notzrim (Nazarenes) would be a specific reference to that Christian
character of these Jews. But according to Jerome’s report, even this is not a
Jewish condemnation of Christians in general but rather applies to those poor
folks who couldn’t tell the difference properly and thought that they were
both.[16]
The total de-legitimation
that Jerome seeks to accomplish of the both-Jews-and-Christians in his letter
to Augustine by declaring them “nothing,” the Rabbis (whom he calls anachronistically
“Pharisees”) seek to accomplish through the medium of a curse against those
same Jews and-Christians when they come to the synagogue. While both would
undoubtedly have denied it angrily, Jerome and the Rabbis are engaged in a kind
of conspiracy to de-legitimate these folks who defined themselves as both
Jewish and Christians, in order that the checklists remain absolutely clear and
unambiguous.
As we can see, these seemingly innocuous checklists
are really tools of power, not simply description. If, thunders Jerome, you
believe in the Nicene Creed, get out of the synagogue, and you will be a
Christian. If you stay in the synagogue and drop your belief in Christian
doctrine, then the Pharisees will agree to call you a Jew. Fill in the boxes correctly on the checklist, or you are neither a
Christian nor a Jew. The very fact that Jerome and the Rabbis needed to
fight against these minim, these Nazarenes who thought they were both Jews and
Christians, suggests that they did, in fact, exist and in sufficient numbers to
arouse concern…”[17]
What did God speak in the Tanach?
Deuteronomy 32:15-21 (Tanakh)
15So Jeshurun grew fat and kicked—you grew fat and gross and coarsee—he forsook the God who made him and spurned the Rock of his support.
15So Jeshurun grew fat and kicked—you grew fat and gross and coarsee—he forsook the God who made him and spurned the Rock of his support.
16They incensed Him
with alien things, vexed Him with abominations.
17They sacrificed
to demons, no-gods, gods they had never known, new ones, who came but lately,
18You neglected the
Rock that begot you, forgot the God who brought you forth.
19The Lord saw and
was vexed and spurned His sons and His daughters.
20He said: I will
hide My countenance from them, and see how they fare in the end. For they are a
treacherous breed, children with no loyalty in them.
21They incensed Me
with no-gods, Vexed Me with their futilities,
Rabbi
Sha’ul (Paul) says this:
Romans
9:1-33
“…I say the truth in Moshiach, I lie not, my
conscience also bearing me witness in Ruach HaKodesh,
That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow
in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Moshiach for my
brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom
pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of
the Torah, and the service of Elohim, and the promises; Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Moshiach came, who is over all, Elohim
blessed forever! Amen. Not as though the word of Elohim hath taken none effect.
For they are not all Yisrael, which are of Yisrael: Neither, because they are
the seed of Avraham, are they all children: but, In Yitzchak shall thy seed be
called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the
children of Elohim: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
For this is the word of promise, At this time
will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. And not only this; but when Rivkah
also had conceived by one, even by our father Yitzchak; (For the children being
not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of Elohim
according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It
was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Yaakov
have I loved, but Esav have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there
unrighteousness with Elohim? Elohim forbid! For he saith to Moshe, I will have
mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have
compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but
of Elohim that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for
this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee,
and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he
mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say
then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay
but, O man, who art thou that repliest against Elohim? Shall the thing formed say
to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power
over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another
unto dishonour? What if Elohim, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his
power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to
destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the
vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath
called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? As he saith also in
Hoshea,
I will call them my people, which were not my people; and
her beloved, which was not beloved.
And it shall come to pass, that in the place
where it was said unto them,
Ye are not
my people; there shall they be called the children of the living Elohim.
Yeshayahu also crieth concerning Yisrael, Though
the number of the children of Yisrael be as the sand of the sea, a remnant
shall be saved: For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness:
because a short work will YY make upon the earth. And as Yeshayahu said before,
Except YY -TZvaot had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like
unto Gomorrha. What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not
after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness
which is of faith. But Yisrael, which followed after the Torah of
righteousness, hath not attained to the Torah of righteousness.
Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith,
but as it were by the works of the Torah. For they stumbled at that
stumblingstone;
As it is written, Behold, I lay in TZiyon a
stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be
ashamed…”[19]
We, the Messianic community, are considered by all to
be a “no-people”, a foolish bunch that is wanted by none, despised by most and
gratefully though, loved by God. But it is with a heavy heart that we occupy
this place, this place between two people that we do love, and so hope and pray
for reconciliation.
This is why I have
searched the Scriptures to find the Truth, to see who my Messiah really is, for
in knowing Him, there can be a place we all can come and find rest. Indeed, we
are all one family unto God, albeit some of us are looked upon as the black
sheep… My Jewish brethren, I profoundly humble myself before you and ask your
forgiveness for the cruelties that were perpetrated upon you in the name of
Jesus – but it was not Jesus who committed these acts against you, but failed
men who sought power and control over the masses in the name of religion.
Likewise, I would ask you to ask forgiveness from your brethren who, as Jews,
have come to believe in the Messiah Yeshua; they saw the hand of God long
before any of us have. We want, as the no-people, to walk beside God in the cool
of the day like Adam once did – and that is the thrust of today’s lesson, how
God has made all things new by His Messiah, Yeshua. Unfortunately, we won't get there today - many other matters cry out for our attention.
It has taken us a
while to get to this point, and people
read blogs for their brevity; sorry ‘bout that, I can’t be brief. There is so
much to cover, so much to try to explain, that maybe no one reads these at all.
That doesn’t mean I should not try. Truth matters; see 1 Cor. 2:6-10; Col. 1:7-14;
2 Tim. 2:11-19; 1 Tim. 6:1-5; Matthew 22:29; Luke 11:28;
1 Cor. 15:1,2; 2 Tim. 4:1-5 and Eph. 6:14 to learn how important
sound Truth and correct belief really is. And part of the truth I’ve discovered
is that there is a rich history of ancient Jewish thought that held to the idea
of a divine/human redeemer, as seen in Daniel, chapters 7 and 10-12.
Daniel 7:9-14 (NASB95)
9) “I kept looking Until athrones were set up, And the Ancient of Days took His seat; His bvesture was like white snow And the chair of His head like pure wool. His dthrone was 1ablaze with flames, Its ewheels were a burning fire. (10) “A river of afire was flowing And coming out from before Him; bThousands upon thousands were attending Him, And myriads upon myriads were standing before Him; The ccourt sat,
9) “I kept looking Until athrones were set up, And the Ancient of Days took His seat; His bvesture was like white snow And the chair of His head like pure wool. His dthrone was 1ablaze with flames, Its ewheels were a burning fire. (10) “A river of afire was flowing And coming out from before Him; bThousands upon thousands were attending Him, And myriads upon myriads were standing before Him; The ccourt sat,
And dthe books
were opened. (11) “Then I kept looking because of the sound of the 1boastful words which the horn was
speaking; I kept looking until the beast was slain, and its body was destroyed
and given to the aburning 2fire. (12) “As for
the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but an extension of life
was granted to them for an appointed period of time. (13)“I kept looking in the night visions, And
behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a aSon of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him. (14) “And to Him was given adominion, Glory and 1ba kingdom, cThat all the peoples, nations and men of every 2language Might serve Him. dHis dominion is an everlasting dominion
Which will not pass away; eAnd His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed.” [20]
In Daniel’s narrative we clearly can see that there seems to be two
divine figures, One who is called the Ancient of Days and the other was “…like
a Son of Man…”. At the beginning of the narrative there are thrones
set up, (plural כָּרְסֵא korsēʾ),
indicating that places were set up more than one ruler. Here, the one unto the
Son of Man is brought before the Ancient One, and has power and dominion
bestowed upon him by the Elder; this was understood by the ancient Jewish sages
as one of two possible interpretations: 1) that the “Son of Man” was a symbol
of a collective, possibly of the faithful of Israel, or 2) that the “Son of
Man” is actually what is alluded to here in Daniel: a second divine figure, a
theophany co-substantial with Yahvey Himself. But does the continuing narration
of Daniel support this conclusion?
Daniel 7:15-28 (HCSB)
Interpretation of the Vision
Interpretation of the Vision
15 “As for me,
Daniel, my spirit was deeply distressed within me, f and the visions in my mind terrified me. g 16 I approached one of those who were standing by and asked him h the true meaning of all this. So he let
me know the interpretation of these things: i 17 ‘These huge beasts, four in number, are four kings who will rise from
the earth. 18 But the holy ones of the •Most High will receive the kingdom and
possess it forever, yes, forever and ever.’ j
19 “Then I
wanted to know the true meaning of the fourth beast, k the one different from all the others,
extremely terrifying, with iron teeth and bronze claws, devouring, crushing,
and trampling with its feet whatever was left. 20 ⌊I also wanted to know⌋ about the 10 horns l on its head and about the other horn that
came up, before which three fell—the horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spoke
arrogantly, m and that was more visible than the others. 21 As I was
watching, this horn waged war n against the holy ones and was prevailing over
them 22 until the Ancient of Days arrived and a judgment o was given in favor of the holy ones of
the Most High, for the time had come, and the holy ones took possession of the
kingdom.
23 “This is
what he said: ‘The fourth beast will be a fourth kingdom on the earth,
different from all the other kingdoms. It will devour the whole earth, trample
it down, and crush it. 24 The 10 horns p are 10 kings who will rise from this
kingdom. Another, different from the previous ones, will rise after them and
subdue three kings. 25 He will speak words against the Most
High q and
oppress r the holy ones s of the Most High. He will intend to change religious festivals t and laws, u and the holy ones will be handed over to him for
a time, times, and half a time. v w 26 But the court will convene, x and his dominion will be taken away, to be
completely destroyed forever. y 27 The kingdom, dominion, and greatness of the kingdoms under all of
heaven will be given to the people, the holy ones of the Most High. His kingdom
will be an everlasting kingdom, z and all rulers will serve and obey Him.’
28 “This is
the end of the interpretation. As for me, Daniel, my thoughts terrified me
greatly, a and my
face turned pale, b but I kept the matter to myself.” c [21]
It would seem both sides have a point. Boyarin explains:
“…Daniel’s vision itself seems to require that we understand “the one
like a son of man” as a second divine figure. The angelic decoding of the
vision in the end of the chapter seems equally as clearly to interpret “the one
like a son of man” as a collective earthly figure, Israel or the righteous of
Israel. No wonder the commentators argue. The text itself seems to be a house
divided against itself. The answer to this conundrum is that the author of the
Book of Daniel, who had Daniel’s vision itself before him, wanted to suppress
the ancient testimony of a more than-singular God, using allegory to do so. In
this sense, the theological controversy that we think exists between Jews and
Christians was already an intra-Jewish controversy long before Jesus.
Ancient Jewish readers might well have reasoned, as
the Church Father Aphrahat did, that since the theme of riding on the clouds
indicates a divine being in every other instance in the Tanakh (the Jewish name
for the Hebrew Bible), we should read this one too as the revelation of God, a
second God, as it were. The implication is, of course, that there are two such
divine figures in heaven, the old Ancient of Days and the young one like a son
of man.[22]
Such Jews would have had to explain, then, what it means for this divine figure
to be given into the power of the fourth beast for “a time, two times, and a
half a time.” A descent into hell—or at any rate to the realm of death—for
three days would be one fine answer to that question.
The Messiah-Christ existed as a Jewish idea long before
the baby Jesus was born in Nazareth. That is, the idea of a second God as
viceroy to God the Father is one of the oldest of theological ideas in Israel.
Daniel 7 brings into the present a fragment of what is perhaps the most ancient
of religious visions of Israel that we can find. Just as seeing an ancient
Roman wall built into a modern Roman building enables us to experience ancient
Rome alive and functioning in the present, this fragment of ancient lore
enabled Jews of the centuries just before Jesus and onward to vivify in the
present of their lives this bit of ancient myth.
The rest, as they say, is Gospel. But the point is
that these ideas were not new ones at all by the time Jesus appeared on the
scene…”[23]
He continues:
“…Taking the two-throne vision out of the context of
Daniel 7 as a whole, we find several crucial elements: (1) there are two
thrones; (2) there are two divine figures, one apparently old and one
apparently young; (3) the young figure is to be the Redeemer and eternal ruler
of the world.[24]
It would certainly not be wrong to suggest, I think, that even if the actual
notion of the Messiah/Christ is not yet present here, the notion of a divinely
appointed divine king over earth is, and that this has great potential for
understanding the development of the Messiah/Christ notion in later Judaism
(including Christianity, of course). The second-God Redeemer figure thus comes,
on my view, out of the earlier history of Israel’s religion. Once the messiah
had been combined with the younger divine figure that we have found in Daniel
7, then it became natural to ascribe to him also the term “Son of God.” The
occupant of one throne was an ancient, the occupant of the other a young figure
in human form. The older one invests the younger one with His own authority on
earth forever and ever, passing the scepter to him. What could be more natural,
then, than to adopt the older usage “Son of God,” already ascribed to the
Messiah in his role as the Davidic king of Israel, and understanding it more
literally as the sign of the equal divinity of the Ancient of Days and the Son
of Man? Thus the Son of Man became the Son of God, and “Son of God” became the
name for Jesus’ divine nature—and all without any break with ancient Jewish
tradition.
The theology of the Gospels, far from being a radical
innovation within Israelite religious tradition, is a highly conservative
return to the very most ancient moments within that tradition, moments that had
been largely suppressed in the meantime—but not entirely…”[25]
Looking at Rabbinical writings, we can also see this similiar interpretation of Daniel 7:
(From the Babylonian Talmud)
“…[ibid., ibid.
5]: "And the Lord came down" (singular). [Ibid. xxxv. 7]: "And
there God appeared" (the term in Hebrew is plural); however [ibid., ibid.
3]: "Unto the Lord who answered me" (singular). [Deut. iv. 7]:
"For what great nation is there that hath gods so nigh unto it?"
However, it reads farther on, "as is the Lord our God every time we call
upon him." [II Lam. vii. 23]: "Which God went?" (the term
in Hebrew is plural).
However [Dan.
vii. 9]: "I was looking down until chairs were set down, and the Ancient
of days seated himself" (singular). But why are all the above-mentioned
written in plural? This is in accordance with R. Johanan, who said elsewhere
that the Holy One, blessed be He, does not do anything until he consults the
heavenly household, as it reads [ibid. iv. 14]: "Through the resolve of
the angels is this decree, and by the order of the holy ones is this
decision." However, this answer is for all the plurals mentioned, except
the last one, "the chairs." Why are they in plural?
One for Him and one for David. So R. Aqiba in a
Boraitha. Said R. Elazar b. Azaryah to him: Aqiba, how do you dare to make the
Shekhina common? It means one chair for judgment and one for mercy. Did Aqiba
accept this, or not? Come and hear the following Boraitha: One for judgment and
one for mercy. So R. Aqiba. Said R. Elazar b. Azaryah to him: Aqiba, what hast
thou to do with Haggada? Give thy attention to Negain and Ohaloth. It means one
for a chair to sit upon and one for a footstool…”[26]
Whatever the precise reading of Daniel 7 is from the
Talmudic passage, it can be seen that from the Rabbis portrayed they understood
that this passage presented a theophany.[27]
It is also worth noting, that this particular section of the (Rodkinson) Talmud was in a
collection of sayings that were explaining how to “correctly answer” questions
posed by “Minim”[28].
So the controversy continues.
This controversy though, is all throughout Jewish
literature; some examples below:
"All the prophets
prophesied only of the days of the Messiah." [Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin
99a]
"A king shall come
forth from the sons of Jesse, and the Messiah shall grow up from his sons’
sons." [Targum to Yesha'yahu 11:1 in the Tanakh]
"Thus says the
L~rd of Hosts, saying, ‘Behold the Man whose name is the Messiah who shall be
revealed.’" [Targum to Z'kharyah 6:12 in the Tanakh]
"It was taught in the School of Elijah, the world will endure 6,000
years - 2,000 years in chaos, 2,000 with Torah, and 2,000 years will be the
days of the Messiah." [Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 97a]
"Rabbi Hillel
said, ‘there shall be no Messiah for Israel, because they have already enjoyed
him in the days of Hezekiah.’ Rabbi Joseph said, ‘may G~d forgive him (Hillel)
for saying so. Now, when did Hezekiah flourish? During the First Temple. Yet Zechariah,
prophesying in the days of the second, proclaimed, ‘rejoice greatly O daughter
of Zion. Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem. Behold, thy King cometh unto thee! He
is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt
the foal of an ass. (Zechariah 9:9)’"
[Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 99a]
"Dip your morsel
of bread in the vinegar (Ruth 2:14). This refers to the Messiah’s sufferings,
for it is said in Isaiah 53:5: ‘He was pierced through for our transgressions,
he was bruised for our iniquities.’" [Midrash Ruth Rabbah, 2.14]
"Rabbi Yochanan
said, ‘The Messiah - what is his name?’… And our Rabbis said, ‘the pale one… is
his name,’ as it is written ‘Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our
sorrows - yet we considered him stricken by G~d, smitten by him and
afflicted.’" [Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 98, p. 2]
"The Messiah our
righteousness has turned from us. We are alarmed, we have no one to justify us.
Our sins and the yoke of our transgressions he bore. He was bruised for our iniquities.
He carried on his shoulders our sins. With his stripes we are healed (Isaiah
53). Almighty G~d, hasten the day that he might come to us anew; that we may
hear from Mt. Lebanon (figurative reference to the Temple), a second time
through the Messiah." [Ancient hymn-prayer by Eliezer Hakkalir sung during
the Musaf Service on Yom Kippur; included in some Siddurs]
"Seventy weeks are decreed for your people and your holy city, to put
an end to transgression, to make an end of sin, to atone for iniquity, to bring
in everlasting righteousness, to confirm the visions and prophets, and to
anoint the Most Holy Place… After sixty-two weeks, the Messiah (Mashiach) will
be cut off and have nothing. The people of a coming prince will destroy the
city (Jerusalem) and the Sanctuary (Temple)." [Tanakh, Dani'el 9:24-26]
"Who has believed what we
have heard? To whom is the arm of Adonai revealed? For before Him he grew up
like a young plant, like a root out of dry ground. He had no form or beauty. We
saw him, but his appearance did not attract us. He was despised and shunned by
men, a man of pains and familiar with illness; like one from whom we would hide
our faces. He was despised and we had no regard for him. In truth, it was our
infirmities he bore, and our pains that he suffered; yet we regarded him as
punished and afflicted by G~d. He was wounded because of our sins and crushed
because of our iniquities. The chastisement he bore made us whole, and through
his wounds we are healed. We all like sheep went astray; we turned, each one,
to his own way. Yet Adonai laid on him the guilt of all of us… After this
ordeal, he will see satisfaction. By his knowledge my righteous servant makes
many righteous; it is for their sins that he suffers. Therefore I will give him
a share with the mighty; for he exposed himself to death and was numbered among
the sinners. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the
transgressors." [Tanakh, Yesha'yahu 53]
"I may remark then, that our Rabbis with one voice accept and
affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the King Messiah, and we
ourselves shall adhere to the same view." [Rabbi Mosheh El-Sheikh
regarding Yesha'yahu 53 in the Tanakh]
"Now there was about this time, Yeshua (Eaysoos in Greek), a wise man,
if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a
teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him
both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was Mashiach (Christos in
Greek); and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had
condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake
him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets
had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and
the tribe of "Christians" (followers of Messiah), so named from him,
are not extinct at this day." [Antiquities of the Jews, book 18, chapter
3, paragraph 3; Yosef ben Mattityahu a.k.a Josephus]
So who do you say He is? I have poured over
contemporary Jewish and Christian literature, trying to find out about this
seemingly glaring disconnect between the Creed of Yeshua “Sh'ma Yis'ra'eil
Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad. , Hear,
Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One…” and the Christian Trinitarian
formula that seems to be at such odds with the monotheistic beliefs of Judaism
and what have I found? More questions than answers. I stand corrected in my
original belief that Judaism had always believed in the concept of One God because the facts just say something different: the ancient sages debated a compound unity, or a
sharing of the powers of the Godhead as seen in their debates of Daniel 7.
If they could come to no consensus, where does this leave me in my beliefs?
To be honest, I still lean toward One God, One
Sovereign King of Glory, and His Messiah Yeshua, His only begotten Son. I at
this time still tend to view Messiah born as a man, brought into existence at
just the right time, He who lived a sinless life, and offered Himself up as
God’s perfect sacrifice to redeem all men back to the Father. He was raised
from the dead and exalted and glorified to be God’s Son and Regent, to rule and reign
at the Father’s right hand till all is accomplished.
That said, there is still more to examine. I believe
with all my heart Yeshua is divine, just not convinced as Christian theology
holds that He is YHVH also (Son of God, Son of Man yes; God the Son? The jury is still out, so to speak). But upon examination of Jewish literature, there
are questions I have to resolve. As I said at the beginning of our study, I
will not put Yahvey in a box; I’ll let Him reveal Himself to me as He chooses,
so that I can know Him – and in turn, know once and for all who Yeshua is. So the
search for the Messiah continues – and I believe it is a search that is vital
to all believers today for we truly want to worship as Yeshua had said:
(John 4:7-26, The Scriptures 1998)
“…A woman of Shomeron [Samaria] came to draw water.
יהושע [Yeshua/Jesus in Hebrew] said to her,
“Give Me to drink.”
For His taught ones had gone
off into the city to buy food. The woman of Shomeron therefore said to Him,
“How is it that You, being a Yehuḏite [Jew], ask a drink from me,
a woman of Shomeron?” For Yehuḏim do not associate with Shomeronites.
יהושע answered and said to her,
“If you knew
the gift of Elohim, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give Me to drink,’ you
would have asked Him, and He would have given
you living water.”
[1 Footnote: 1Jer. 2:13, Jer. 17:13,
Zech. 14:8, John 7:37-39].
The woman said to Him, “Master, You have no vessel, and the well is deep.
From where, then, do You have living water? Are You greater than our father Yaʽaqob [Jacob]̱, who gave us the well, and drank from it himself, and his sons, and his
cattle?”
יהושע answered and said to her,
“Everyone drinking of this water shall thirst
again, but whoever drinks of the water I give him shall certainly never thirst.
And the water that I give him shall become in him a fountain of water springing
up into everlasting life.”
The woman said to Him, “Master, give
me this water, so that I do not thirst, nor come here to draw.”
יהושע said to her,
“Go, call
your husband, and come here.”
The woman answered and said, “I have
no husband.”
יהושע said to her,
“You have
well said, ‘I have no husband,’ for you have had five husbands, and the one
whom you now have is not your husband. What you have said is true.”
The woman said to Him, “Master, I see that You are a prophet. “Our fathers
worshipped on this mountain, but you people say that in Yerushalayim [Jerusalem] is the place where one
needs to worship.”
יהושע said to her,
“Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you
shall neither on this mountain, nor in Yerushalayim, worship the Father. “You
worship what you do not know. We worship what we know, because the
deliverance is of the Yehuḏim.”
[1 Footnote: 1Ps. 147:19, Isa. 2:3, Isa. 14:1,
Isa. 56:6-8, Ezek. 47:22-23, Zech. 2:10-11, Zech. 8:23, Rom. 2:20, Rom. 3:2,
Rom. 9:4, Rev. 21:12 & 24.]
“But the
hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father
in spirit and truth, for the Father also does seek such to worship Him. Elohim
is Spirit, and those who worship Him need to worship in spirit and truth.”
The woman said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming, the One who is
called Anointed. When that One comes, He shall announce to us all.”
יהושע said to her,
“I who am
speaking to you am He.” [29]
Yeshua said we worship what we do not know; what we
need to do is worship what we know and that can only be found if we look for
Him in all things, and that my friends means we look for Him through Judaism,
not around it. Our next installment will continue our search for the Messiah,
and how to encounter the divine.
[1] Israeli Authorized Version of the Holy Bible,
electronic edition, e-Sword® version 10.2.1, Copyright ©2000-2013 by Rick Myers
[2] Israeli Authorized Version of the Holy Bible, electronic edition,
e-Sword® version 10.2.1, Copyright ©2000-2013 by Rick Myers.
[3] P'ru•shim
(Pharisees), sing. Parush—The P'rushim and Tz'dukim were
the two main components of the religious establishment in Yeshua's time. The P'rushim
focussed on the Torah and what it requires of ordinary people, rather
than on the temple ritual. When the temple was destroyed in 70 c.e., the P'rushim
were in a position to develop their tradition into the basis for Jewish life
everywhere; this tradition is the core of the Talmud and of modern
religious Judaism. Mat_3:7+.
[4] Ye•ru•sha•la• yim
(Jerusalem)—capital of Eretz-Yisra'el since the days of King David.
Psalm 48 calls it "the city of our God, . . . beautiful for situation, the
joy of the whole earth." Mat_2:1+.
[5] tal•mid, fem. tal•mi•dah,
pl. tal•mi•dim—disciple, student. The relationship between a talmid
and his rabbi was very close: not only did the talmid learn facts,
reasoning processes and how to perform religious practices from his rabbi, but
he regarded him as an example to be imitated in conduct and character (see Mat_10:24-25;
Luk_6:40; Joh_13:13-15; 1Co_11:1). The rabbi, in turn, was
considered responsible for his talmidim (Mat_12:2; Luk_19:39;
Joh_17:12). Mat_5:1+.
[6] n'ti•lat-ya•da•yim—ceremonial
hand-washing prescribed by the Oral Torah to be done before meals and at
other times in order to be ritually pure; it continues to be a norm in Orthodox
Judaism. Mat_15:2+.
i Exodus 20:12;
Deuteronomy 5:16
j Exodus 21:17;
Leviticus 20:9
[7] Ye•sha`•yah, -ya•hu
(Isaiah, Esaias)—Tanakh prophet. Mat_3:3+.
k Isaiah 29:13
[8] Stern, D. H.
(1998). Complete Jewish Bible: an English
version of the Tanakh (Old Testament) and B’rit Hadashah (New Testament)
(1st ed., Mt 15). Clarksville, MD: Jewish New Testament Publications.
[9] Ernst Jenni and Claus
Westermann, authors; Mark E. Biddle, translator, Theological Lexicon of
the Old Testament, vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997), p.
523
[10]
Avram Yehosua, http://www.seedofabraham.net/G-d-The_Missing_o.html
[11] Boyarin, Daniel (2012-03-20).
The Jewish Gospels (Kindle Locations 320-343). New Press, The. Kindle Edition.
[12] Jewish
Publication Society. (1997, c1985). Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures : A new
translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the traditional Hebrew text.
Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.
[13] Jewish
Publication Society. (1997, c1985). Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures : A new
translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the traditional Hebrew text.
Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.
[14] Boyarin, Daniel (2012-03-20).
The Jewish Gospels (Kindle Locations 408-410). New Press, The. Kindle Edition.
[15] Jerome, Correspondence, ed. Isidorus Hilberg, Corpus Scriptorum
Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum (Vienna: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften, 1996), 55:381–82 [Boyarin, Daniel (2012-03-20). The Jewish
Gospels (Kindle Locations 2204-2205). New Press, The. Kindle Edition.]
[16]See also Reuven Kimelman, “Birkat
Ha-Minim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish Prayer in Late
Antiquity,” in Aspects of Judaism in the Greco-Roman Period, vol. 2, Jewish and
Christian Self-Definition, ed. E.P. Sanders, A.I. Baumgarten, and Alan
Mendelson (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981), 226–44, 391–403. [Boyarin,
Daniel (2012-03-20). The Jewish Gospels (Kindle Locations 2206-2208). New
Press, The. Kindle Edition.]
[17] Boyarin, Daniel (2012-03-20).
The Jewish Gospels (Kindle Locations 416-462). New Press, The. Kindle Edition.
f-
Meaning of Heb. uncertain Arabic sha˓ara suggests the rendering “Whom your fathers did not know.”
-f
Meaning of Heb. uncertain Arabic sha˓ara suggests the rendering “Whom your fathers did not know.”
[18] Jewish Publication Society. (1997, c1985). Tanakh:
The Holy Scriptures : A new translation of the Holy Scriptures according to the
traditional Hebrew text. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.
[19] Israeli Authorized Version of the Holy Bible. electronic edition, e-Sword® version 10.2.1. Copyright
©2000-2013 by Rick Myers, n.d.
•
The Hebrew word is Elyon; it is often used with
other names of God, such as Hebrew El (God) or Yahweh (Lord); it is used to refer to God as
the supreme being.
[22] For a study of the ubiquity of
this pattern, see Moshe Idel, Ben: Sonship
and Jewish Mysticism, Kogod Library of Judaic Studies (London: Continuum,
2007).
[23] Boyarin, Daniel (2012-03-20). The Jewish Gospels (Kindle Locations 727-745).
New Press, The. Kindle Edition.
[24] Boyarin notes: “…After the
rabbis, I have found only Sigmund Olaf Plytt Mowinckel, He That Cometh: The Messiah Concept in the Old Testament and Later
Judaism, trans. G.W. Anderson (Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1956), 352,
emphasizing this point sufficiently, but, of course, since the literature is
massive, I may (almost certainly have) missed others…” The Jewish Gospels
(Kindle Locations 2253-2255). New Press, The. Kindle Edition.
[25] Boyarin, Daniel (2012-03-20). The Jewish Gospels (Kindle Locations
766-779). New Press, The. Kindle Edition.
[26] Rodkinson, Michael L. NEW EDITION OF THE BABYLONIAN
TALMUD Original Text Edited, Corrected, Formulated, and Translated into English.
10 vols. Electronic First Edition, e-Sword® v.10.2.1 by Rick Myers, ©2000-2013 n.d.
Vol. 8, Sanhedrin 22, p 371. [see also BT, full edition, Ḥagiga 14a below:]
“…One verse says: His raiment was as
white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool;11 and [elsewhere] it is
written: His locks are curled and black as a raven!12 — There is no
contradiction: one verse13 [refers to God] in session,14 and the other in
war.15 For a Master said: In session none is more fitting than an old man, and
in war none is more fitting than a young man.
One passage says: His throne was fiery
flames;16 and another Passage says: Till thrones were places, and One that was
ancient of days did sit!17 — There is no contradiction: one [throne] for Him,
and one for David; this is the view of R. Akiba. Said R. Jose the Galilean to
him: Akiba, how long wilt thou treat the Divine Presence as profane!18 Rather,
[it must mean], one for justice and one for grace.19 Did he accept [this
explanation from him, or did he not accept it? — Come and hear: One for justice
and one for grace; this is the view of R. Akiba. Said R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah to
him: Akiba, what hast thou to do with Aggadah?20 Cease thy talk, and turn21 to
[the laws concerning defilement through] leprosy-signs and tent-covering!22
Rather, [it must mean] one for a throne and one for a stool; the throne to sit
upon, the stool for a footrest, for it is said: The heaven is My throne, and
the earth is My foot-rest.23…” from http://halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Chagigah.pdf
[27] Theophany:
Theophany, from the Ancient Greek θεοφάνεια, refers to the appearance of a
deity to a human or other being. This term has been used to refer to
appearances of the gods in the ancient Greek and Near Eastern religions. While
the Iliad is the earliest source for descriptions of theophanies in the
Classical tradition, probably the earliest description of a theophany is in the
Epic of Gilgamesh. The term theophany has acquired a specific usage for
Christians and Jews with respect to the Bible: It refers to the manifestation
of God to man; the sensible sign by which the presence of God is revealed. Only
a small number of theophanies are found in the Hebrew Bible, also known as the
Old Testament. Definitions.net, STANDS4 LLC, 2013. "theophany."
Accessed November 7, 2013. http://www.definitions.net/definition/theophany.
[28] minim ("sectarians")
according to some Jewish sources are those who recognize God but nonetheless
deny Him. (Usually, but not always, used in reference to those who profess
Yeshua as Messiah.)
[29] Institute for Scripture Research - ISR. The Scriptures
1998 Bible®. Electronic Edition, e-Sword v.10.2.1 by Rick Myers, ©2000-2013.
Published by Institute for Scripture Research - ISR, 1998. [Emphasis and definitions mine]
[30] I have used this ending over and
over in all that I write, but I have to give credit to the one who used it
before me: Dr. J. Vernon McGee, God rest his soul. I’m sure he doesn’t mind…
No comments:
Post a Comment